Abstract

BackgroundWeighing is a key component in the treatment of eating disorders. Most treatment protocols advocate for open weighing, however, many clinicians choose to use blind weighing, especially during the early phase of treatment. Despite considerable debate about this issue in the literature, there is no empirical evidence supporting the superiority of one weighing approach over the other. In addition, little is known about patients’ perspectives of open and blind weighing and which weighing practice they view as more acceptable and/or beneficial for their treatment.MethodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 41 women with a current or past diagnosis of Anorexia or Bulimia Nervosa: 26 were undergoing specialist inpatient treatment (n = 13 being blind weighed; n = 13 being open weighed) and 15 were community members who have recovered from an eating disorder. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using framework methods. Participant demographics, clinical characteristics, weighing anxiety and weight concerns were also assessed.ResultsQualitative analyses yielded five themes: (1) therapy engagement and progress; (2) Control and tolerance of weight uncertainty; (3) treatment team relationships and autonomy; (4) life outside of treatment; and (5) weighing practice preferences and rationale. Participants stated that blind weighing decreased anxiety and eating disorder psychopathology (e.g., weight preoccupation) and increased treatment responsivity. For many, relinquishing control over their weight facilitated body trust and was a necessary step towards recovery. Participants found that not knowing their exact weight helped challenge their overconcern with weight. Lack of support post-discharge was identified as a major difficulty of blind weighing. Overall, the majority of participants preferred blind weighing, particularly at the early, acute stage of treatment, whereas open weighing was viewed as more suitable at later stages of recovery. Quantitative analyses found current blind-weighed patients felt significantly less anxiety around being weighed and had greater tolerance of weight uncertainty than current open-weighed patients.ConclusionsThis study provided in-depth patient insights into open versus blind weighing practices. The next step for future research will be to supplement these insights with treatment outcomes gained from randomised controlled trials comparing the two weighing practices.

Highlights

  • Plain English summary Weighing is a key component in the treatment of eating disorders, but the particulars of how patients should be weighed is a point of debate in the field

  • This study explored how current and recovered eating disorder patients (N = 41) view and have experienced open weighing and blind weighing in treatment

  • Analysis of interview data found that the majority of participants preferred blind weighing, at the acute stage of treatment, whereas open weighing was viewed to be most suitable at lager stages of recovery

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Weighing is a key component in the treatment of eating disorders. Most treatment protocols advocate for open weighing, many clinicians choose to use blind weighing, especially during the early phase of treatment. In-session weighing is a prominent feature of eating disorder treatments, partly because of the need to monitor the physical safety of some patients [1]. Open weighing involves in-session weighing whereby the therapist and the patient check the patient’s weight together. Blind weighing involves the therapist not sharing the patients’ weight with her or him. When patients are blind weighed, they are usually asked to step on the scale backwards and the weight is not explicitly discussed [3]. The rationale for blind weighing includes the desire to minimise anxiety and distress that may result from patients seeing their weight (especially when it increases), reduce the patients’ focus on the specific number on the scale, and expose patients to weight uncertainty [3, 5]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call